I was born in Poonch (Kashmir) and now I live in Norway. I oppose war and violence and am a firm believer in the peaceful co-existence of all nations and peoples. In my academic work I have tried to espouse the cause of the weak and the oppressed in a world dominated by power politics, misleading propaganda and violations of basic human rights. I also believe that all conscious members of society have a moral duty to stand for and further the cause of peace and human rights throughout the world.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

No matter what hardships
Indo-Pakistani revolutionary Dada Amir Haider Khan came across, he held
belief in the eventual emancipation of the toiling masses, not by any
outside force or agency but through their own struggles shaped by their
political consciousness for a worthy human existence.

-

by Nasir Khan

-
All those who oppose imperialistic wars and plunder, subjugation and
oppression of weaker nations and peoples, and wide-spread violations of
human rights in various parts of the world will be glad to see the
publication of the two-volume autobiography of Indo-Pakistani
revolutionary Dada Amir Haider Khan. The life and struggles of this
eternal revolutionary who stood for advancing the cause of workers and
peasants and firmly adhered to the world-outlook of proletarian
internationalism is quite amazing. No matter what hardships he came
across, he held belief in the eventual emancipation of the toiling
masses, not by any outside force or agency but through their own
struggles shaped by their political consciousness for a worthy human
existence.

-

Dada Amir Haider Khan was not an idealist; he was a man of action.
By his practical example he showed how to work and organise workers
locally so that they could stand for and protect their political and
economic interests. In his personal life, he always remained a fakir, a
‘homeless wanderer’, as he used to call himself. Neither did he own any
valuable possessions. He had donated the share of his inherited land for
building a school in his ancestral village, a poor and deprived area of
small farmers.

-

I met Dada half a century ago, in 1957, when I started my college
education in Rawalpindi. This early contact with him was to become a
lifelong friendship and close comradeship. He was above all a sincere
and trustworthy man and a political activist. But he was also a
charismatic person; those who met him were drawn towards his magnetic
personality.

-

Dr Hasan N. Gardezi edited and supervised the publication of Dada’s
memoirs with great diligence and a sense of duty to preserve the
historical role of a truly great and unique revolutionary who emerged
from the part of the world now called Pakistan. I offer my thanks to
Professor Gardezi for his tireless efforts to publicise the work of
Dada, and also thank other friends who have in one way or the other
contributed to the task. I believe all the progressive people who have
known Dada or those who will come to know about him through the
publication of his memoirs will highly appreciate the work of Professor
Gardezi. He has preserved the legacy of the great revolutionary for the
coming generations of radical and progressive people.Volume 1 was first
published in New Delhi in 1989, prefaced by our esteemed Comrade V.D.
Chopra. Now the memoirs in two volumes are available from Karachi.[ To
obtain your copies please contact: Muhammad Kamran, Office Assistant,
Pakistan Studies Centre, University of Karachi, Karachi, 75270, E-mail pscuok@yahoo. com
For further information the editor can be reached at: gardezihassan@ hotmail.com ]
-
Historians and scholars in Marxist tradition may also find the
following publications and references to Dada Amir Haider Khan helpful:

I republish below a remarkable book review by Jamil Omar
***************************************************************Book Review by Jamil OmarChains to Lose
Life and Struggle of a RevolutionaryMemoirs of Dada Amir Haider Khan
Edited by Hassan N. Gardezi,
Publisher: Pakistan Study Centre, University of KarachiAn Indian Che Guevara
The party had also begun extending its activities to Madras. A group
of Andhra and Tamil students, amongst them P. Sundarayya were recruited
to the CPI by Amir Hyder Khan … (E. M. S. Namboodripad Chief Minister of
Kerala, The Communist Party in Kerala – Six Decades of Struggle and
Advance.)
Thus, the CPI divided into two separate parties. The group which
assembled in Calcutta would later adopt the name ‘Communist Party of
India (Marxist)’. The CPI (M) also adopted its own political programme.
P. Sundarayya was elected general secretary of the party. (History of
the Communist Movement in India)
While he lived, Dada Amir Haider Khan struggled to change the course
of history, now in death he would have us change our view of it.
Dada surfed the crest of change all over the globe during the first
half of the twentieth century, which makes a simple account of his life
read like contemporary world history. The account is so reliable and
close to life that that it should prove a major primary source for
scholars of history and politics. For political activists who have
carried on the tradition bequeathed by Dada, the account is essential
reading for a critical understanding of their own past.His life
So little is known about Amir Haider Khan’s very full life that it
seems appropriate to start by presenting a very brief overview:
1900 born in a remote village in Rawalpindi district. Orphaned at an
early age, put in a madrassah. Escapes to Calcutta, brushes with the
underworld handling Afghan opium.
1914 joins British merchant navy in Bombay. Observes at close hand
the dilemma of Muslim soldiers in the British army fighting their
Turkish brethren in Iraq.
1918 jumps British ship in New York. Joins American merchant marine.
An Irish nationalist, Joseph Mulkane, introduces Dada to anti-British
political ideas.
1920 meets Indian Nationalists and Ghadar party members in New York.
Starts distributing ‘Ghadar ki Goonj’ to Indians in seaports around the
world.
Passes the exam of Assistant Second Marine Engineer.
1922 dismissed from ship after the great post war strike. Works and
travels inside the USA. Boiler engineer with the Pennsylvania Railroad.
Airplane pilot. Autoworker in Detroit.
Political activist, works with anti-Imperialist League and the Workers (Communist) Party of the USA.
1926 sent by the American party to the Soviet Union to study at the University of the Toilers of the East.
1928 completes the University course in Moscow and arrives in Bombay.
Establishes contact with Ghate, Dange Bradley, senior communists in
Bombay.
March 1929 escapes arrest in the Meerut Conspiracy case and makes his
way to Moscow to inform the Communist International (Comintern) on the
situation in India and seek their assistance.
1929 arrives back in Bombay, meets and briefs B. T. Randive.
1930 Dada’s connection in Bombay with the Comintern turns informer.
Dada rushes to Moscow to apprise them of the development and devise
alternate plans. Attends the International Trade Union (Profintern)
Congress as member of the presidium, also attends the 16th Congress of
the CPSU.
1931 returns to Bombay. Sent to Madras to avoid arrest as still
wanted in the Meerut Conspiracy case. Carries on political work all over
South India under the pseudonym of Shankar. Sets up the Young Workers
League.
1932 arrested by British for bringing out a pamphlet praising the Bhagat Singh Trio.
1936 transferred from Madras to Muzzafargarh jail, then transferred to Ambala jail.
1938 released. Starts open public political activity in Bombay. The
Congress left elects him to the INC Bombay Provincial Committee. Attends
the INC Annual General meeting in Ramgarh, Bihar.
1939 rearrested as Second World War breaks out. Interned in Nasik jail where Dada writes the first part of his memoirs.
1942 last of the Communists to be released after People’s War thesis.
Trade Union work in Bombay. Attends the Natrakona (Mymansingh) All
India Kissan Sabah in 1944.
1946 arrives in Rawalpindi on the eve of Pakistan to look after local
party work. Organises a network to hide and safely repatriate Hindu
families during the partition riots.
1949 arrested from Party office Rawalpindi under the Communal Act.
Released after 15 months. Rearrested after a few months from Rawalpindi
Kutchery for organizing the defence of Hassan Nasir and Ali Imam. When
Liaqat government launches the Rawalpindi Conspiracy case Dada moved to
Lahore fort and imprisoned with Faiz Ahmad Faiz, Fazal Din Qurban, Dada
Feroz ud Din Mansur, Kaswar Gardezi, Hyder Bux Jatoi, Sobo Gayan
Chandani, Chaudhry Muhammad Afzal, Ahmed Nadeem Qasmi, Zaheer Kashmiri,
Hameed Akhtar etc. Released after campaign in Pakistan Times and Imroze,
but restricted to his village. Shifted to Rawalpindi when Dada seen
influencing the military jawans from his area.
1954 Bogra [Prime Minister] to appease his masters in USA bans the
Communist Party of Pakistan on 24 July 1954. Dada arrested later bailed
out by Mohammad Ali Kasuri.
1958 Ayub imposes martial law. Dada arrested interned in Rawalpindi
jail with Afzal Bangash, Kaka Sanober and other comrades from the
Frontier Province.
1970s and 1980s Dada spends his twilight years in Rawalpindi. Donates
his land and with his own labour builds a Boys High School in his
village, then builds a Girls School together with a science laboratory.
Gets them approved and hands them over to the Government.
26 December 1989 Dada passes away.
The striking fact about the above chronology is that Amir Haider like
Flash Gordon had an uncanny knack of being at the right place at the
right time. But the analogy ends here. Flash is a fictional character
representing the Imperial British, Dada was a real life adversary of
Imperialism who fought the British with such skill and tenacity that
American professors Overstreet and Windmiller were forced to admit that
“Amir Haider Khan was the most dangerous individual in British India.”
Throughout his life we see Dada, the born rebel, standing up against
injustice and fighting to better the human condition. While Britannia
ruled the waves, Dada fought for the rights of the Indian seamen working
deep below the decks. When the sun did not set on the British Empire,
Dada risked his life to distribute banned Ghadar Party literature to
Indians all around the globe. As the new world started to prevail, Dada,
a naturalized American at the age of twenty, learnt and struggled
against the system from within – as an International Workers of the
World activist, as a working class family member, as a hobo, as a Klu
Klux Klan victim, as an avid reader of Popular Mechanics and Scientific
American and builder and flyer of airplanes, as a political activist
working closely with the great Agnes Smedley and much more. When the
world was shaken by the great socialist revolutions, Dada, now a full
member of the Bolshevik party in Moscow, was closely following on
detailed maps the march of Chou En Lai forces towards Shanghai. And
during the golden hour of the Indian freedom struggle, Dada almost
single handedly broke the political isolation imposed upon India by the
British. Despite being on the British most wanted list, Dada using
different pseudonyms and covers carried on political and organizational
work in various parts of India. Work, for which Dada is still loved in
Rawalpindi, revered in Bombay and worshipped in South India.
Dada was an international revolutionary – a Che Guevara of another
age and on a bigger stage. He met and worked closely with some of the
greatest socialist leaders of the twentieth century, which included
besides others Thomas Mann (Engles’ student), Rosa Luxemburg (German
revolutionary), Clara Zetkin (German women rights activist), Karl Radek
(leader of Communist International), Liu Shao Chi (later president of
China), Agnes Smedley (American anti-imperialist), Ralph Fox (historian
who died resisting Franco’s march to Madrid), Piatniski (secretary to
Comintern and Stalin) and nearly all the leaders of the Indian freedom
movement. Dada’s steadfast struggle for freedom earned him the respect
of Indian nationalists from the Andaman Islands to Peshawar, from
gentlemen members of the parliament to Naujawan Bharat Sabah
revolutionaries.His memoirs

Writing with revolutionary responsibility, Dada is careful not to wash
any dirty linen in public. Like a true Bolshevik, Dada chooses to
maintain public silence on issues where he disagreed with the official
Party line. On the face of it this should make Dada’s memoirs
politically anodyne. But Dada’s actions were anything but politically
neutral and they speak for themselves. ‘Dada’ may be an honorific title
in Pakistan but in Bombay it was applied to Amir Haider Khan and others
to denigrate them as obstinate seniors, for these ‘foggies’ doggedly
waged inner Party struggle against political opportunism. It is also
rumoured that Pakistan provided the new generation of comrades in Bombay
with an excuse to shunt Dada from Bombay to Rawalpindi. Yet Dada’s
memoirs are a testimony that he remained faithful to Party discipline to
the very end of his life. Even in his rumblings as an old man he was
careful not to insinuate against some of the old comrades or the
People’s War thesis or a host of other issues which clearly troubled
him. However, a close reading of the memoirs reveals that even Party
discipline could not compel Dada to distort or deny facts. For example,
Dada, the main representative of the Third International (Comintern) in
India, puts it on record that on the China question Trotsky was correct
and Stalin wrong; he criticizes M. N. Roy, who has since been
rehabilitated, of fiscal irresponsibility and S. A. Dange, who has since
been debunked, of weak character. It is perhaps on account of such
‘deviations’ that Dada’s memoirs nearly got suppressed. Once by our own
publisher of Baluchistan insurgency fame – although this may well have
been the far worse crime of sheer irresponsibility; and once by the CPI
press – which on the face of it appears to be a more deliberate act of
indexing. But thanks to the untiring zeal of Dr. Hassan Gardezi, the
memoirs’ editor, Dada’s invaluable autobiography has finally been
preserved for posterity.
The memoirs in themselves are a straight forward narration of events,
however, delayed availability of such rare and authentic material is
bound to reopen many debates. A critical study of the memoirs would go a
long way in helping us better understand and appreciate our past. Even a
non-critical reading like the present one, sparked a number of
politically relevant questions. I would like to briefly take up a few of
these here.Muslim demagogy and Pakistani Hagiography
Hagiography prefers to ignore rather than explain inconvenient facts.
The mainstay of our local brand of hagiography is that Pakistan was
created for Islam. However, our hagiographers have never bothered to
explain that if so, then how come the Pakistan movement was led by
modern secular Muslims and supported by the Communist Party while
mullahs of all callings opposed it tooth and nail.
Another enigma for local hagiography is the Khilafat Movement.
Khilafat Movement based on pan-Islamic demagogic sentiments was popular
among urban Muslims for a brief period towards the end of the First
World War. But with its fantastic scheme of Tark-i- Amwaal and Hijrat it
violated the interests of propertied Muslim classes. The propertied
Muslim classes, for their part, were always more attracted to the option
of a separate homeland where they could pursue their economic interests
unhindered by the dominant Hindu bourgeoisie. Hence it comes as no
surprise that while the Khilafat Movement was befriended by the
Congress, it was vehemently decried by Jinnah. Pakistani hagiography has
long taxed itself to square the Muslim demagogic Hijrat Movement with
its exact opposite, that is, the Pakistan Movement. The hagiographic
compromise is to gloss over the unsavoury details of the Khilafat
Movement while awarding Bi Amma’s sons the status of national heroes.
Dada’s memoirs clearly reveal the true nature of the Khilafat
movement. In Bombay its support lay in the Urdu speaking Muslim mill
workers in Madanpura, who were the descendents of ruined hand weavers of
Bihar and UP. The Khilafat newspaper openly incited these Muslims to
violence when Hindu-Muslim riots broke out in Bombay but with typical
demagogic irresponsibility it blamed the Communists. This service must
have been well appreciated by Khilafat’s bourgeoisie friends in the
Congress, who watched with glee the fall of support for the fledging Red
Flag Worker’s Union amongst Muslim workers and were keen to employ them
as strikebreakers.
The Khilafat demagogy also ruined the poor Muslim Mopla peasants of
Malabar. Muslim Mopala peasant’s under the influence of Khilafat
demagogy left their lands and chose to migrate to Afghanistan. Like most
muhajirs they were simply herded back by the Afghans. But on returning
to Malabar they found their lands occupied by Hindu landlords. What
ensued was a full-scale civil war in which thousands died and even more
were herded like animals into prisons. Dada through his historic jail
struggle succeeded in winning for these poor and illiterate Muslim
prisoners decent living conditions.
Hagiography not only glosses over the crimes of yesterday, it makes
us perpetrate new ones today. The truth of this aphorism is vividly
demonstrated by the fact that while the Khilafat leader Mohammad Ali
Johar is remembered through a prestigious Society in Karachi and a
modern Town in Lahore, all trace of Dada Amir Haider Khan, the greatest
of Indian Muslim freedom fighters, has been conveniently removed from
our official history.The conspiracy of conspiracy cases:
‘Divide and Rule’ may well have been the first rule of British
Imperialism, but ‘give the dog a bad name and hang him’ was a close
second. The second rule was repeatedly employed by the British against
the Communists in the guise of Conspiracy Cases. During the 1920s
British attempted to crush the nascent Communist Movement through a
spate of Conspiracy Cases such as the First Peshawar Conspiracy Case,
Second Peshawar Conspiracy Case, Moscow Conspiracy Case (in all these
cases Soviet trained Muslim Communists were the main accused); the
Cawnpore Bolshevik Conspiracy Case (local Communists main accused);
Lahore Conspiracy Case (Bhagat Singh main accused), the Meerut
Conspiracy (Dada Amir Haider one of the main accused).
Fortunately the outcome of the conspiracy of conspiracy cases seems
to be determined by the Toynbee ‘Challenge-Response’ rule. Weak
movements are destroyed by it while strong movements are strengthened by
it. The Meerut Conspiracy case singularly backfired thanks to Dada’s
efforts on an International scale, which resulted in Meerut solidarity
campaigns all over the world. For its part the Communist Party of Great
Britain put up Shaukat Usmani, who was a prisoner in Meerut, as its
candidate in the 1931 general election for St. Pancras South East. The
candidature of Usmani was aimed by the CPGB to ensure freedom for India,
and to highlight the plight of the Meerut prisoners. In this election,
the communists polled seventy five thousand votes.
After Independence, this Imperialist conspiracy of conspiracy cases
was continued by the government of Pakistan, with Liaqat Ali Khan
launching the Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case to counter the growing
influence of the Communists.Remote controlling revolutions
International movements never make successful local revolutions. The
business is far to complicated to be successfully managed remotely. In
his memoirs Dada, however, is of the view that had the Comintern trained
and assisted the Indian communists on the scale it assisted the
Chinese, he and his comrades could have built a strong United Front with
the Congress and developed the Satyagarha Movement into a genuine
revolutionary movement. But the facts as related in his memoirs show
that the Comintern was unstinting in its assistance to India, the
problem lay in more objective realities.
Perhaps the most valuable lesson hidden in Dada’s memoirs is that
revolutions are made locally not remotely. Culled from the memoirs, here
are some of the reasons why:
Priorities may change in the remote location. For example, under
Lenin Central Asiatic Bureau of Comintern set up in Tashkent a school to
train the Khilafat Movement muhajirs drifting in Central Asia into an
Indian army of revolutionaries. However, the Indian Military School was
closed in April 1921, as a quid pro quo for industrial assistance that
Britain promised to Soviet Russia, under Anglo-Russian Trade Pact in
March 1921.
Stalin in 1943, to appease Roosevelt and Churchill, dismantled the whole Third International.
Local political complexities cannot be fully determined from a
distance nor can foreign representatives be relied upon to come up with
correct on spot remedies. Comintern’s role in the Chinese revolution
provides many examples of how the best of International intentions can
create serious local problems. During the united front period the great
debate in the Comintern regarding China was whether to launch the
agrarian revolution or not. Trotsky as member of the Comintern Executive
Committee proposed the immediate launching of the agrarian revolution
in the countryside, however, the majority led by Stalin rejected
Trotsky’s thesis on the ground that launching the agrarian revolution at
this stage would split the National United Front and would throw the
reactionary Kuomintang leaders into the imperialist camp. But when
America and Japan got directly involved, split in the United Front
became inevitable and saving the lives of the communist cadres became
top priority, M. N. Roy, Comintern’s representative in China, bungled
the situation by disclosing confidential instructions to the left wing
of the Kuomintang, with the result that Kuomintang moved swiftly to
liquidate all Communists they could lay their hands upon, more than 5000
were executed in Shanghai alone.
Promotes Embassy Socialism: Reliance on material or intellectual
assistance from outside weakens local confidence and resolve. In the
long run it promotes a degenerate political culture that serves the
interest of the foreign embassies (and donors) and not of the local
masses.
Epilogue
Commenting on Dada’s quiet passing away the local press reported that
“He lived and died virtually unsung. That did not diminish him. It
makes the rest of us look more small.” One hopes that with the
publication of Dada’s memoirs he would be better known and the long
conspiracy to deny and defame him will come to an end. For this little
known Indian Che Guevara is yet to take his rightful place in the
pantheon of twentieth century revolutionaries.

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

And so for a moment or two the slaughter of Palestinian civilians and
the destruction in Gaza City has ceased; the oppression, intimidation
and terror throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territories though
continues unabated. The ‘Pillar of Cloud’ has done its destructive work
and blown over, until the next time Israel feels the urge to wreak
chaos, kill civilians and tear families apart. How many times must we
watch this slaughter, how many more tears will be shed, lives ruined,
futures denied, as the peace activist Izzeldin Abuelaish in The Observer
18/11/2012 asks “How many more massacres can Palestinians stand? How
many can onlookers tolerate?”

During the week long Israeli military storm, and amid the circular
argument espoused by the chief Israeli military spokespeople and
repeated infinitum by Israel’s spineless allies, that ‘when Hamas stops
firing rockets, Israel will cease its brutality’, 162 Palestinians were
killed and according to Al Mezan Centre for Human Rights (AMHR)[i] 1,039
injured – half of which were women and children, so much for ‘surgical
strikes’ Prime Minister Netanyahu; homes, schools, mosques,
Universities, places of work and infrastructure were reduced to rubble.
Six Israeli’s died according to the United Nations (OCHA) and 219
injured, from the 1,456[ii] rockets fired by Hamas into Israel. Despite
the heavy Palestinian civilian loss of life, in particular children,
Netanyahu, who loves a fight, said, the BBC report[iii] “Israel will do
“everything in its power” to avoid civilian casualties in the conflict
with Hamas.”

The overwhelming majority of Americans think this war is not worth fighting.

Foreign policy played a minor role in a presidential election that
focused on jobs, jobs, jobs. But like it or not, the United States
is part of a global community in turmoil, and U.S. policies often fuel
that turmoil. The peace movement, which lost steam during Obama’s first
term because so many people were unwilling to criticize the president,
has a challenge today to reactivate itself and increase its
effectiveness by forming coalitions within the progressive movement.

This revitalized peace movement must address five issues.

The first is Afghanistan. Despite Obama’s talk about getting out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014,
the U.S. military still has some 68,000 troops and almost 100,000
private contractors there at a cost of $2 billion a week. And Obama is
talking about a presence of U.S. troops, training missions,
Special Forces operations and bases for another decade. But the
overwhelming majority of Americans think this war is not worth fighting,
a sentiment echoed in a recent New York Times editorial “Time to Pack Up.”
It is indeed that time. The peace movement must push for an
immediate withdrawal and for ruling out any longterm presence in
Afghanistan.

Saturday, November 24, 2012

When Barack Obama finally spoke out publicly about the Israeli assault on Gaza, at a press conference, he wove an astonishingly thick web of deception and distortion.
I’m no Obama-basher. But when I see him bashing and trashing the
truth so blatantly, I have to speak out. I have to express my pain,
because I know that his misleading words will increase the risks to my
loved ones and fellow Jews in Israel and the much greater risks to the
victims of Israeli aggression in Gaza.

Palestinians
carry the body of a child belonging to the al-Dalo family during a mass
funeral in Gaza City November 19, 2012. (photo: Mohammed Salem/Reuters)

Of course to hear Obama tell it, it’s the Israelis who are the
victims. “The precipitating event here that’s causing the current crisis
… was an ever-escalating number of missiles” fired from Gaza into
Israel, he said. “And there’s no country on Earth that would tolerate
missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.”

This is the same old tale Americans have been getting from their
presidents, politicians, and press for decades: Those nasty Arabs,
attacking Jews out of the blue for no good reason that we can see.

Friday, November 23, 2012

“The Palestinian people want to be free of the occupation,”
award-winning Israeli journalist Gideon Levy summed up this week. It is
that simple. This latest Israeli military assault on the people of Gaza
is not an isolated event, but part of a 45-year occupation of the sliver
of land wedged between Israel and the Mediterranean Sea, where 1.6
million people live under a brutal Israeli blockade that denies them
most of the basic necessities of life. Without the unwavering bipartisan
support of the United States for the Israeli military, the occupation
of Palestine could not exist.

The Re-Election of Barack Obama

Nasir Khan, November 7, 2012
Those left-of-centre Americans who had opted to vote for a lesser
evil than the bigger evil in the shape of Mitt Romney have some ground
to celebrate. In fact, anything was possible; Romney could have also
found his way to the White House. American political system is deeply
flawed and has become more mouldy and outdated. It does not represent
the hopes and aspirations of the American people any longer. The
presidential election itself is a contest in which big money talks and
imposes its decisions on the masses. Actual problems facing the
superpower that has hegemony over a large part of humanity and regions
of the world are brushed aside and a diversionary picture put before the
electorate that produces much sound but signifies nothing. Big gala
shows and rallies make the whole thing look comical and cheap
advertisement. That’s not what the democracy is about or can ever be
justified for hiding the concerns of millions of ordinary men and women
and their economic and social hardships.
President Obama in his first term proved to be a true representative
of American military-industrial complex. He carried out where Bush had
left. He also extended the Afghan war of aggression into Pakistan and in
most cowardly fashion has been conducting the killings of Pakistani
‘militants’ in Pakistan by his drone attacks. The people of Pakistan and
other places who become victims of such assassinations have no means at
their disposal to combat the advanced technological robots that kill
them at his orders.
Now the question is: Will he continue his policy of such killings and
disregard international law and the Geneva Conventions? Like Bush and
Condi Rice, his foreign policy in the Middle East has been a total
charade. Has he any sense of moral responsibility towards the
Palestinian people who are still under occupation of Israel and its
cruel policies? Without American military and financial support, Israel
couldn’t have carried out the occupation or oppression of a captive
population.
These things are not a secret and certainly President Obama is well
aware of all these things. Now he has a new four-year term of office.
Will he be able to change the course of his foreign policy or will he
continue what he did during the last four years? Only the time will
tell. But he has some opportunity to show respect to international law,
the Geneva Conventions and stop the illegal killing of people in foreign
countries. He can also advance the cause of peace in the Middle East,
not by reiterating the American mantra of the ‘security of Israel’ but
stand for the legitimate rights of the Palestinians under Israeli
Zionist occupation and oppression.
We will judge President for his actions, not his words. Let’s hope
his words and actions match from now on. I congratulate him in the hope
that he may have the courage to stand for what is right and not military
might.

A Pillar Built on Sand

In response to a recent upsurge in tit for tat strikes between Israel
and the Palestinians in Gaza, Israel decided to ratchet up the violence
even further by assassinating Hamas’s military chief, Ahmad Jabari.
Hamas, which had been playing a minor role in these exchanges and even
appears to have been interested in working out a long-term ceasefire,
predictably responded by launching hundreds of rockets into Israel, a
few even landing near Tel Aviv. Not surprisingly, the Israelis have
threatened a wider conflict, to include a possible invasion of Gaza to
topple Hamas and eliminate the rocket threat.

There is some chance that Operation ‘Pillar of Defence’, as the
Israelis are calling their current campaign, might become a full-scale
war. But even if it does, it will not put an end to Israel’s troubles in
Gaza. After all, Israel launched a devastating war against Hamas in the
winter of 2008-9 – Operation Cast Lead – and Hamas is still in power and still firing rockets at Israel. In the summer of 2006 Israel went to war against Hizbullah in
order to eliminate its missiles and weaken its political position in
Lebanon. That offensive failed as well: Hizbullah has far more missiles
today than it had in 2006 and its influence in Lebanon is arguably
greater than it was in 2006. Pillar of Defence is likely to share a
similar fate.

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

The United States government and its subject peoples think of the US
as “the world’s only superpower.” But how is a country a superpower
when its entire government and a majority of the subjects, especially
those members of evangelical churches, grovel at the feet of the Israeli
Prime Minister? How is a country a superpower when it lacks the power
to determine its own foreign policy in the Middle East? Such a country
is not a superpower. It is a puppet state.

In the past few days we have witnessed, yet again, the “American
superpower” groveling at Netanyahu’s feet. When Netanyahu decided to
again murder the Palestinian women and children of Gaza, to further
destroy what remains of the social infrastructure of the Gaza Ghetto,
and to declare Israeli war crimes and Israeli crimes against humanity to
be merely the exercise of “self-defense,” the US Senate, the US House
of Representatives, the White House, and the US media all promptly
declared their support for Netanyahu’s crimes.

The US and Britain stand behind Israel’s onslaught on Gaza. Justice requires a change in the balance of forces on the ground

Egypt’s foreign minister and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (second
and third from left) in a hospital in Gaza City on 20 November, visiting
a Palestinian woman wounded in an Israeli air strike. Photograph: Ahmed
Zakot/REUTERS

The way western politicians and media have pontificated about
Israel’s onslaught on Gaza, you’d think it was facing an unprovoked
attack from a well-armed foreign power. Israel had every “right to
defend itself”, Barack Obama declared. “No country on earth would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.”

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

[This post is an
updated version of an article published in the online English edition of
Al Jazeera, 17 Nov 2012, taking account of some further developments in
the new horrifying unfolding of violence in Gaza.]

President Obama, upon his arrival
today in Bangkok at the start of a state visit to several Asian
countries, reminded the world of just how unconditional U.S. support for
Israel remains. Obama was quoted as saying, “There is no country on
earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from
outside of its borders. We are fully supportive of Israel’s right
to defend itself.” Much is missing from such a sentiment, most
glaringly, the absence of any balancing statement along the following
line: “and no country would tolerate the periodic assassination of its
leaders by missiles fired by a neighboring country, especially during a
lull achieved by a mutually agreed truce. It is time for both sides to
end the violence, and establish an immediate ceasefire.”

But instead of such statesmanship from
this newly elected leader what we hear from Ben Rhodes, his Deputy
National Security Advisor, who is traveling with the president in Asia
is the following: that the rockets from Gaza are “the precipitating
factor for the conflict. We believe Israel has a right to defend itself,
and they’ll make their own decisions about the tactics they use in that
regard.” Of course, these tactics up to this point have involved
attacking a densely urbanized population with advanced weaponry from air
and sea, targeting media outlets, striking residential structures, and
killing and wounding many civilians, including numerous children. Since
when does ‘the right to defend oneself’ amount to a license to kill and
wound without limit, without some clear demonstration that the means of
violence are connected with the goals being sought, without a
requirement that force be exclusively directed against military targets,
without at least an expression of concern about the proportionality of
the military response? To overlooks such caveats in the present context
in which Gaza has no means whatsoever defend itself indicates just how
unconditional is the moral/legal blindfold that impairs the political
wisdom and the elemental human empathy of the American political
establishment.

Wednesday, November 07, 2012

Those left-of-centre Americans who had opted to vote for a lesser
evil than the bigger evil in the shape of Mitt Romney have some ground
to celebrate. In fact, anything was possible; Romney could have also
found his way to the White House. American political system is deeply
flawed and has become more mouldy and outdated. It does not represent
the hopes and aspirations of the American people any longer.

The
presidential election itself is a contest in which big money talks and
imposes its decisions on the masses. Actual problems facing the
superpower that has hegemony over a large part of humanity and regions
of the world are brushed aside and a diversionary picture put before the
electorate that produces much sound but signifies nothing. Big gala
shows and rallies make the whole thing look comical and cheap
advertisement. That’s not what the democracy is about or can ever be
justified for hiding the concerns of millions of ordinary men and women
and their economic and social hardships.

President Obama in his first term proved to be a true representative
of American military-industrial complex. He carried out where Bush had
left. He also extended the Afghan war of aggression into Pakistan and in
most cowardly fashion has been conducting the killings of Pakistani
‘militants’ in Pakistan by his drone attacks. The people of Pakistan and
other places who become victims of such assassinations have no means at
their disposal to combat the advanced technological robots that kill
them at his orders.

Now the question is: Will he continue his policy of such killings and
disregard international law and the Geneva Conventions? Like Bush and
Condi Rice, his foreign policy in the Middle East has been a total
charade. Has he any sense of moral responsibility towards the
Palestinian people who are still under occupation of Israel and its
cruel policies? Without American military and financial support, Israel
couldn’t have carried out the occupation or oppression of a captive
population.

These things are not a secret and certainly President Obama is well
aware of all these things. Now he has a new four-year term of office.
Will he be able to change the course of his foreign policy or will he
continue what he did during the last four years? Only the time will
tell. But he has some opportunity to show respect to international law,
the Geneva Conventions and stop the illegal killing of people in foreign
countries. He can also advance the cause of peace in the Middle East,
not by reiterating the American mantra of the ‘security of Israel’ but
stand for the legitimate rights of the Palestinians under Israeli
Zionist occupation and oppression.

People will judge President for his actions, not his words. Let's hope his
words and actions match from now on. The oppressed and victimised people
and nations at the hands of US imperialism and its allies will be truly
glad if he shows resolute courage to stand for what is right and not
military might.

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

What has he done?

Richard Falk is
the present United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Palestinian
Territories. His job is to monitor the human rights situation in the
territories, with particular reference to international law, and report
back to both the U.N. General Assembly and the United Nations Human
Rights Council. He is professor emeritus of international law at
Princeton University and well qualified for his United Nations post.

Professor Falk was appointed in 2008 to a six year term in his
present position. That means he has been telling the unsettling truth
about Israeli behavior for four years now, with another two to go.
Repeatedly he has documented Israeli violations of international law and
its relentless disregard for Palestinian human rights. For instance:

– In his 2008 report Falk documented the “desperate plight of civilians in Gaza.”

– In his 2009 report Falk described Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip as a “war crime of the greatest magnitude.”

Friday, November 02, 2012

Perhaps one day they’ll arrive over a neighborhood near you. Drones
are becoming America’s weapon of choice. Domestically so far, they’re
used only for eyes in the sky spying.

Big Brother wants to watch everyone all the time. Don’t bet against
eyes not being weaponized one day to punish as well as spy. That’s how
rogue states operate.

America is by far the worst and most dangerous. Waging war on
humanity is policy. Imagine living in a country run by officials who
think war is good.

The more the better. Permanent ones. Wage them while pretending it’s
done for peace. Few question why America is always at war somewhere.
Scant attention is paid to the trillions of dollars spent at the expense
of vital domestic needs gone begging.